The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-08-27
WHO is ORTHODOX
BY REV. S. CRANE, d. d.
(Galesburg Ill.)


ory" claim to be orthodox, par ercel-
lence. The Andover men are heretics,
but those who hold that probation ends
at death, are pre-eminently orthodox.
Let us see how this is.
There is one doctrine that is funda-
mental to all orthodoxy. 1t is that
there is no salvation without faith in
Christ. Orthodoxy has always held
faith in Christ to be absolutely essen
tial to salvation. We do not know of
a creed in orthodox Christendom in
which this doctrine is not affirmed.
The Saybrook platform but utters the
concensus of all orthodoxy, when it
says: "Those not elected, although
they may be called by the ministry of
the word and may have some common
operations of the spirit, yet not being
effectually drawn by the Father, neither
do nor can come unto Christ, and there
fore cannot be saved, much less can
men not protesting the gospel be saved
in any other way whatsoever, be they
never so diligent to frame their lives
according to the light of nature, and
the laws of that religion they do pro-
fess, and to maintain that they may, is
very pernicious, and to be detested.'
Now the Andover men teach this
doctrine very strongly and positively.
They teach that all who are saved will
be saved through faith in Christ and
obedience to his truth. All who are
saved of those who are in heathen dark
ness will be saved by exercising faith
in Christ in the next world. Here or
hereafter there is only one way of sal
walton; only one door to the kingdom,
faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Upon
this fundamental point, therefore, they
are soundly orthodox. But how is it
with those who oppose them Take
first the school of DR.. Withrow. OF
course, if the fundamental doctrine of
orthodoxy be accepted, that faith in
Christ is absolutely necessary to salvs-
tion, and it be added that that faith
must be exercised in this world or
never, then all who die in heathen dark
ness are lost. Not believing in Christ
before death, and having no opportunity
to believe in him after death, there is
no hope for them. Indeed, this was
the faith of orthodoxy until recently.
Until within the last quarter Of GEN.
tury orthodoxy held that all the heather
are lost. This was the doctrine when
the American Board was organized,
and has been the doctrine of missions
until within the last twenty five years.
1t is not, however, the doctrine now.
That all the heather will be lost is not
orthodox doctrine now. Those who
claim to be soundest in the faith stoutly
repudiate this doctrine. They hold that
multitudes of the heather will be saved.
DR.. Withrow tells us an "innumerable
multitude" out of all nations, who have
never heard of Christ in this life, twill
be praising the God of salvation in the
next"
But how does DIR. Withrow and his
school save these dead heather? Does
he save them by having them come to a
knowledge of Christ and his truth in the
next world By no means. That would
be future probation. No, he saves
them by the light of nature" These
good heather lived up to the best light
they had, and therefore they are saved.
But this starts some very curious ques-
tions. If the 'slight of nature" is suf-
ficient for salvation, what is the use of
any other light ? What is the use of
the gospel 1t has been held, time out
of mind, that the ''light of nature" is
not sufficient for salvation, therefore
the gospel. Natural religion is not
sufficient, therefore the need of revealed
religion. But this school tells US that
natural religion is sufficient. Why then
have revealed religion?
Further, why send the gospel to the
heather ? If they can be saved by
nature, why not let nature save them
What need have they of the gospel
Judging from Christian lands, will more
of them be saved with the gospel than
without it Do Christians live up to
their light any better than heather do
theirs =? Besides, does not this theory
cut " the nerve of missions 7" 1t holds
that the heather can be saved by 1.-The
light of nature" Let them live up to
"the light of nature" then and be saved.
What utter folly to make such sacri-
fees to send them the gospel.
But further, what kind of light is
this that comes from nature? Accord
ing to this school, human nature is
essentially depraveda and external nature
is badly twisted. How, from such a
nature, can there come any saving
light9 How can a depraved nature
open a door into the kingdom of right
eousness and peace
But finally, how very clear it is-and
this is the point we would emphasize
that this doctrine is not orthodox. Or
thodoxy has never taught that "the